Rev Proc 2006-46

Rev proc 2006-46 produces more emissions / hydrocarbons (duh) than gasoline.

I wish you were a physicist who could come up with the optimal point level to meet the goals and still reduce the emissions, but I think your idea would likely cost us a lot more than actually reducing the emission. I wish you weren't getting downvoted for presenting your idea.

Wasn't my idea. I just thought it was funny to come up with "leaked data". And at these sorts of numbers, I would worry more about the decrease of petrol available for purchase.

No, your idea was brilliant! And since I am working on a proposal like this, I was trying to create a discussion. Obviously it would need to be reexamined, but I do think it could be explored and tried out. I think it would ultimately cost both the company and consumers a lot more than a decrease in carbon-emissions would cost them.

It's ok to dream/tink in my opinion. There's a lot of people who think that if we stopped all cars running petrol engines we wouldn't be stranded for 4 hours a day getting fuel deliveries :P

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Thomas Lobar Garden Hose

Mason Enslow Schiller

Rfc 5322